Unitary state, Federalism and 'Devolution of Power' in Sri Lanka

By Palitha Senanayake

Those who are obsessed with what is termed as a �Tamil problem� in Sri lanka is fervently advocating what they call �devolution of power� to the peripheries as a solution to this problem they perceive. The veneration and faith, some of these disciples of �devolution� have placed upon their �solution� is such that they do not hesitate to consider for a moment whether this would solve or exacerbate the current problems the country is facing, in its realistic nature and content. Often they are so dogmatic they not only disregard the socio economic fallback of this so called �devolution� but also try to silence their critics by calling them names �chauvinists�, �extremists� etc. The �pro devolution� argument is that ones the power is given to the periphery the people in these �un cleared� areas will stop supporting Prabhakaran, withering off his support base.

However in the light of the present developments, it is becoming increasingly clear that the people living in the areas controlled by the LTTE are not people who have the power to do any political work but are mere subjects of a fascist state, kept in that area much against their will. Prabhakaran has seen to it that all such people capable of an independent judgment and political activity have been done to death so that he has only people who can be driven without the need to be governed. Hence the argument of these �pro devolutionist� that ones power is devolved everything is going to be fine, like when you extinguish the darkness by putting on the electric bulb switch, is now beginning to fall flat on their faces.

The tragedy however is that this �pro-devolutionist� do not appear to have the haziest of ideas as to what is meant by these terms like devolution, Unitary State and Federal State. Recently Hon Mr Tissa Vitharana, an ardent �pro bifurcationists� and also the Chairman of the APRC was quoted in the press to say that �of forms of Government let fools contend.� This is a rather irresponsible statement coming from the Chairman of the APRC for unless the people in this country, Sinhalese, Tamils and Muslims diligently consider these terms they would soon find themselves in a situation where they are sliding in to irreversible division and unceasing conflicts.

The term �Devolution� according to the Webster�s Third new International dictionary (1961) is defined as �the delegation or transfer of work or power from the central administration to a local or regional one.� The use of the term delegation should be noted here as delegation is the empowerment of a subsidiary by the lawful power to attend to a specific task. Both power and accountability is transferred in an appropriated quantum to the elected or appointed with the original body losing neither authority nor accountability.

In this context Sri lanka need not initiate new legislation or even the 13th amendment is not required to devolve power because the country already has a sound mechanism for devolving power in the current structure that exists with following bodies:-

14 Municipalities

38 Urban Councils

183 Pradeshiya Sabha

25 District secretaries

249 Divisional Secretariats

These are institutions created after having realized the need to delegate authority to Divisional levels for local administration on a functional basis to facilitate civil well being and not on a political basis to placate any criminals. Of these, the first three categories are made up of elected representatives while the last two categories are officers appointed by the state. All these agents necessarily have to work within the frame work of the state which means that the law in Hambanthota can not be different from that in Kegalle, because there is only one legislator i.e. Parliament. There is thus uniformity and we all live in one country with devolved power. If this is what the pro-devolutionists mean by �devolution of power�, it is just that either their advocacy is superfluous in the Sri lankan context or they do not know what they are clamoring for. Similarly there are no grounds to maintain that the �Chauvinists are against devolution� because there is nobody against devolution but it is just that some �ignorants� know not that that are demanding something that we already have.

The reality then is, even though these pro-devolutionist, likes of Mr Vitharana, appears to demand devolution they are in fact demanding federalism. If not there is no need for him to prepare two lists of powers one for the Central Government and the other for the Provincial Governments.

The term Federal has been defined as �a system of government relating to or derived from a compact between states whereby the terms of the compact surrender their general sovereignty and constitute in to a new state or of relating to a state formed by the consolidation of several states which retains limited residuary of government under the common sovereignty of the new state�.

From the above definition it is obvious that a federal state is made up of several small states getting together for the purpose of forming a state for a particular purpose. All the federal states in the world have come in to being that way (integration) and for instance United States of Americas formed itself in to �United Sates� to fight British invasion, Switzerland formed itself to a state because the cantons were too small and insignificant to be considered as a State, Europe today is in the process of forming in to a quasi federal state because they need to fight bigger powers for global economic clout.

The world history is replete with enough examples where people have formed themselves in to federal state for their own advancement. India is an example where they formed in to a single state to prevent tribalism and protracted conflicts. But India is in fact more Unitary than Federal. Therefore federalism is a process of evolution where countries get integrated. The world history does not have a single example where a single country has been made in to federal to placate the demands of inveterate separatists. If ever that happens in Sri Lanka, we will be the first to go against the laws of global evolution and human civilization.

Federalism in the Sri Lankan context therefore means that the Central Government may have to abdicate some of the powers that they are exercising at the moment in favour of the Provincial administration. The Central Government will permanently cease to have its say on such matters and this process could be irreversible and irrevocable with regard to those matters. What you call this process is still not clear because this could be happening for the first time in the world in Sri lanka.

The practical situation of this abdication could be even more interesting and worth envisaging. Now with federalism we will have 9 Governments for the 9 Provinces passing different laws in keeping with their parochial interests with the Central government being responsible only for those powers which are not abdicated to the provinces, such as Defense and Foreign affairs. In this context when the land powers are bestowed with the Provincial Councils a person from outside that province will not be able to buy any land in the province without the explicit permission of the Provincial Minister of land. Since that outsider is not a voter in the Province (leave alone communalism in the north), it is very likely that such permission would not be granted.

This will develop in to a scenario where a man from Sabaragamuwa can not buy land in the Western Province: can not send his children to a school in the Central province; can not Register a business in Uva Province. Even when he gets about in his car in a different Province the cop may walk up to him and question what he is doing in that Province. Therefore the bottom line of this Fedaralism that the likes of Tissa Vithrana is advocating will finally make Sri lanka an even smaller place where citizens will be confined to their provinces. This is exactly the opposite of other countries where federalism has opened up new vistas for the citizens of those federal states.

This would create a situation where there is imbalanced development, with the Western Province developing itself further with provinces like Uva left far behind. The Tamils, for whose benefit this scheme is expected to be implemented, would be worse off as they will not be able to buy land in Wellawatta and do business in Colombo.

The fact is that the power will go to the Provincial Ministers and as for the ordinary citizen the horizon will become much smaller. We, the citizens of Sri Lanka who are not fortunate to be borne in a big country would be confining ourselves to a still smaller area on our own accord. What a tragedy!

The other point however is that since section 14 (1) of the Sri Lankan Constitution guarantees the right to every citizen to live wherever he wishes, any abdication on the part of the Sri Lanka�s central Government would be ultra-virus the constitution. Sovereignty of the people will also come in to play if the APRC recommends separate legislations to each province. In such a situation each province will have shared sovereignty and a Sri lankan in Sabaragamuwa will have no say with regard to the sovereignty on all the matters of the state because the Central Government has abdicated all but few powers to the different provinces. He will be more of Sabaragamuwite than a SriLankan.

These are some of the technicalities the APRC proposals will entail in addition to the creation of a host of other problems in spheres like, Water sharing, Security, Economic, Trade, Educational, Transport, etc.

For the past 20 years we have been burdened with this �Top Heavy� administration system because India promised to disarm the LTTE as its share of responsibility as per the Indo Lanka Accord. Well, India is no more in Sri Lanka but here we are still fighting the LTTE after being burdened by the Provincial Councils whose recurrent annual expenditure is such that we could build a Mahaweli Project every year with that money.

The champions of putative peace �knew� even then that Indo Lanka accord was �the solution�. The LTTE was a nascent terrorist movement at that time; with no mortars, no planes; no conventional army, no surface to air missilesand no such international support. After 20 years of the 13thammendment they are much more powerful and pushed Sri lanka to the brink of being a �failed state� three years ago. What will the full implementation of the 13th amendment hold in store for Sri Lanka?

Source : Asian Tribune http://www.asiantribune.com/?q=node/13375